What’s in a name

Another entry in the “US politics is deranged” file – Fox News interrogating Obama about what procedural method the Democrats might use to get a straight vote on the healthcare bill:

“Deem and Pass” sounds so much more sinister when you pronounce it “Demon Pass” and introduce it as “the Slaughter Rule”, doesn’t it?

What next? For the remainder of the Obama Administration, will Fox start calling the power of the President to veto legislation the “Obama Skullf*cks Your Grandmother Rule”?

8 responses to “What’s in a name

  1. Are you saying that Fox should not use the same terminology as everyone else to describe the proposed strategy?

  2. I’m saying “the slaughter rule” and “demon pass” are deliberately misleading ways of smearing opponents. It’s not “the same terminology as everyone else” – it’s the Republicans’ terminology.

    And I’m sure the Republican strategists can come up with an equally ridiculously violent name for any other power the Democrats might conceivably have the temerity to exercise, that Fox can then publicise for them.

  3. The Slaughter rule was named after a congresswoman who was instrumental in its early use. “deem and pass” is a description of the process. Just search the terms – all commentators use them.

  4. Oh, come on. Its proper, neutral, name is the “self-executing rule”. The words “slaughter” and “demon” are added in order to, obviously, demonise its use by an opponent. Or to sensationalise it, I suppose.

  5. Slaughter is somebody’s name, and ‘deem and pass’ is hardly pejorative, so much as accurate. What is more interesting is that US politics is so convoluted that this actually matters, and that the Dems think they will trick voters by pretending to not actually vote for the bill itself. Truly head-spinning.

  6. I’m more than happy for them to be held responsible for the Bill.

    The point is that the words “slaughter” and “demon” are deliberately used instead of the neutral and descriptive language because of their sinister connotations.

  7. You’d think Americans, of all people, would understand the concept of what a majority constitutes. You know, 50% +1.

    Imagine if we had this crap in the Australian senate.

    Now, have a look at this very humorous piss-take of Glen Beck by the legend Jon Stewart.
    The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon – Thurs 11p / 10cConservative Libertarianhttp://www.thedailyshow.comDaily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorHealth Care Reform

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s